peterms Posted November 20, 2018 Share Posted November 20, 2018 35 minutes ago, snowychap said: I don't think that's right. Edit: Secondary legislation, surely, requires primary legislation to give it effect. Yes, but most is in place already. You don't pass primary legislation to change eg the detail of benefit rates. And similar things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted November 20, 2018 Share Posted November 20, 2018 (edited) 26 minutes ago, peterms said: Yes, but most is in place already. You don't pass primary legislation to change eg the detail of benefit rates. And similar things. If primary legislation were already in place to enable secondary legislation to push through things that were being put in a finance bill then why on earth would anyone bother with a finance bill? 'Just changing rates' is only possible via SIs if there has already been primary legislation passed that allows that to happen. You do pass primary legislation in order to allow you to 'change, e.g. the detail of benefit rates'. There may well be secondary legislation that allows the government to change some thins in relation to benefit rates, uprating levels, &c. but that's a mile away from what you're claiming. Edited November 20, 2018 by snowychap 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted November 21, 2018 Share Posted November 21, 2018 8 hours ago, snowychap said: If primary legislation were already in place to enable secondary legislation to push through things that were being put in a finance bill then why on earth would anyone bother with a finance bill? 'Just changing rates' is only possible via SIs if there has already been primary legislation passed that allows that to happen. You do pass primary legislation in order to allow you to 'change, e.g. the detail of benefit rates'. There may well be secondary legislation that allows the government to change some thins in relation to benefit rates, uprating levels, &c. but that's a mile away from what you're claiming. Hansard Society: Quote While its importance and centrality to the process of law-making is not in doubt, the process by which delegated legislation is drafted in Whitehall and scrutinised in Westminster is deeply flawed. The acceptance of the system of delegated legislation has been predicated on its reasonable use and application by ministers, coupled with trust in Parliament’s system of scrutiny. But in recent years, the use of delegated legislation by successive governments has increasingly drifted into areas of principle and policy rather than the regulation of administrative procedures and technical areas of operational detail. There has been such an expansion in the scope and application of powers and procedures that a precedent could arguably be found to justify almost any form of delegation a minister might now desire... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted November 21, 2018 Share Posted November 21, 2018 (edited) 4 hours ago, peterms said: Hansard Society: Quote arguably Should not be ignored. Edited November 21, 2018 by snowychap 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted December 9, 2018 VT Supporter Share Posted December 9, 2018 So, it appears that the government spent £2m on a 'charity'run by the military intelligence officers, that ostensibly was supposed to be a counter to Russian propaganda on social media. But then it turns out what it actually ended up doing was attacking Corbyn and the Labour Party. I'm sure the Tory party would agree that this was a damn shame. A damn shame. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted December 9, 2018 Share Posted December 9, 2018 2 minutes ago, Chindie said: So, it appears that the government spent £2m on a 'charity'run by the military intelligence officers, that ostensibly was supposed to be a counter to Russian propaganda on social media. But then it turns out what it actually ended up doing was attacking Corbyn and the Labour Party. I'm sure the Tory party would agree that this was a damn shame. A damn shame. Been happening for decades, won't be any surprise to anyone to the left of Vince Fable. The precise form of it is interesting of course, and it will illustrate some new names whose output is to be ignored as state-sponsored propaganda. Many names in our reputedly independent meeja. Their HQ is not far from me. Perhaps I should wait outside and take photos of everyone entering and leaving, see who comes to challenge me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted December 10, 2018 Moderator Share Posted December 10, 2018 4 hours ago, Chindie said: So, it appears that the government spent £2m on a 'charity'run by the military intelligence officers, that ostensibly was supposed to be a counter to Russian propaganda on social media. But then it turns out what it actually ended up doing was attacking Corbyn and the Labour Party. I'm sure the Tory party would agree that this was a damn shame. A damn shame. It's bang out of order. They're broadly right about Corbyn and Milne etc. but that's beside the point. Channelling taxpayers money to this "charity" which then used (some of) it to critique the (dreadful) opposition party leader and his aide is utterly discreditable. There ought to be some serious flak about it, and in normal times the junior minister or whoever responsible for that area should have to resign. Corbyn's a lamentable arse, but this sort of thing should be stopped and an example made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted December 10, 2018 Moderator Share Posted December 10, 2018 Thinking of starting a drinking game, 1 shot everytime Jeremy Corbyn erroneously thinks there should be a General Election Will someone please tell him about the fixed term parliament act and the fact that he needs 66% of the house I'll be pissed by teatime 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted December 11, 2018 Share Posted December 11, 2018 Quote The Foreign Office minister, Alan Duncan, has ordered an investigation into reports the government provided funding to a Scottish-based company meant to counter online Russian propaganda, which also spread unfavourable views about Jeremy Corbyn. The Institute for Statecraft, based in Fife, received hundreds of thousands of pounds in Foreign Office money. According to the Sunday Mail, leaked documents show it tried to promote tweets calling the Labour leader a “useful idiot” who helped the Kremlin cause, and attacked members of his staff. Speaking on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, Duncan said he had learned about the allegations at the weekend and ordered an immediate investigation. “I don’t know the facts but if there is any kind of organisation for which we are paying which is involved in domestic politics in that way, I would totally condemn it, and I have already over the weekend asked for a report to be on my desk by 10 o’clock this morning to say if there is any such activity,” he said. Asked if this meant anti-Labour attacks by Statecraft must stop, Duncan said: “Not only must it stop, I want to know why on earth it happened in the first place.” Grauniad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted December 11, 2018 Share Posted December 11, 2018 On 10/12/2018 at 15:55, bickster said: Will someone please tell him about the fixed term parliament act and the fact that he needs 66% of the house A simple majority in a no-confidence vote, if not followed by a vote of confidence in 14 days, triggers an election. Here. Quote A defeat on an explicitly worded vote of confidence, and the failure to achieve a second vote of confidence within 14 days, is one of only two ways in which an early election can be called. Hence the caution on calling a vote of confidence, and the need to wait until it can actually be won, instead of making a grand gesture and losing. The DUP need to part company with May before calling the vote, as it's unlikely enough tories will vote against the government on this. The other opposition parties obviously know this, and I suppose they (and some Labour backbenchers) are just positioning themselves rather than genuinely thinking that right now is the time to put forward such a motion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markavfc40 Posted December 11, 2018 Share Posted December 11, 2018 Sky news have run a poll as to who is more trusted, May or Corbyn, to lead the country through Brexit. May got 44%. Corbyn 22%. If the country would be more chaotic under Labour 45% said yes, 33% said it would be more stable. I know it is hardly a definitive poll but given how diabolical this Government have been they should be able to run a poll down the local Conservative club and the majority say Labour could do a better job. Labour should romp home in a general election but if one was called tomorrow I don't even think they would scrape home. I think Corbyn has some great policies but he just isn't connecting with the public and if you can't be polling higher than one of the worst leaders this country has ever had then you simply shouldn't be Labour leader. It is so frustrating that this mob has gotten away with implementing some terrible policies, with destroying our public services and inflicting terrible hardship on the weakest, poorest and most vulnerable amongst us but they have gotten away with it in part due to a weak opposition. Shame on the Tories for what they have done and shame on Labour for not putting up a fight. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted December 11, 2018 VT Supporter Share Posted December 11, 2018 Speaking of Corbyn, Jo Maugham, Brexiteers favourite barrister, claimed yesterday that he had been told by a senior BBC figure there is a conscious effort by the Beeb to conflate Corbyn with negative imagery. Head of live politics at the BBC called him a liar, so Maugham did this... I reckon the lawyer might be right. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted December 11, 2018 Moderator Share Posted December 11, 2018 2 hours ago, Chindie said: Speaking of Corbyn, Jo Maugham, Brexiteers favourite barrister, claimed yesterday that he had been told by a senior BBC figure there is a conscious effort by the Beeb to conflate Corbyn with negative imagery. Head of live politics at the BBC called him a liar, so Maugham did this... I reckon the lawyer might be right. And given the amount of trolling Maugham has been doing towards Corbyn lately, it's hardly like he's a natural Corbynite Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted December 11, 2018 Share Posted December 11, 2018 2 hours ago, Chindie said: Speaking of Corbyn, Jo Maugham, Brexiteers favourite barrister, claimed yesterday that he had been told by a senior BBC figure there is a conscious effort by the Beeb to conflate Corbyn with negative imagery. Head of live politics at the BBC called him a liar, so Maugham did this... I reckon the lawyer might be right. The lawyer is very clearly right. Anyone with functioning eyesight connected to an operational brain can see it. It's interesting that Jolyon should reveal this exchange, as one of the more vocal critics of Corbyn on the grounds that he wasnt EU-friendly enough for his liking. I think we had some discussion here a while back about the semiotics of the editorial decisions behind Newsnight or some other programme presenting Corbyn with a Trotsky hat, against a backdrop of the Kremlin, tinged red, with some saying it was nothing, or coincidental, or just what he was wearing on that day or some such bollocks. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted December 11, 2018 Share Posted December 11, 2018 3 hours ago, markavfc40 said: I think Corbyn has some great policies but he just isn't connecting with the public He's not allowed to connect with the public. Imagine if he got in. The media is owned by holding companies offshore. It would be mayhem. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted December 11, 2018 Share Posted December 11, 2018 22 minutes ago, peterms said: The lawyer is very clearly right. Anyone with functioning eyesight connected to an operational brain can see it. It's interesting that Jolyon should reveal this exchange, as one of the more vocal critics of Corbyn on the grounds that he wasnt EU-friendly enough for his liking. I think we had some discussion here a while back about the semiotics of the editorial decisions behind Newsnight or some other programme presenting Corbyn with a Trotsky hat, against a backdrop of the Kremlin, tinged red, with some saying it was nothing, or coincidental, or just what he was wearing on that day or some such bollocks. I thought the discussion was around newsnight had photoshopped it when it turned out they had not they also had Gavin Williamson agaisnt the same backdrop , though he wasn’t wearing a hat ,presumably because he’s not an old man .. and a soviet stooge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted December 11, 2018 Share Posted December 11, 2018 1 minute ago, tonyh29 said: I thought the discussion was around newsnight had photoshopped it when it turned out they had not they also had Gavin Williamson agaisnt the same backdrop , though he wasn’t wearing a hat ,presumably because he’s not an old man .. and a soviet stooge The whole thing was a construction. There is not a living being, including yourself, who thinks it wasn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VILLAMARV Posted December 11, 2018 Share Posted December 11, 2018 10 minutes ago, Xann said: He's not allowed to connect with the public. Imagine if he got in. The media is owned by holding companies offshore. It would be mayhem. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted December 11, 2018 Share Posted December 11, 2018 3 hours ago, markavfc40 said: Sky news have run a poll as to who is more trusted, May or Corbyn, to lead the country through Brexit. May got 44%. Corbyn 22%. If the country would be more chaotic under Labour 45% said yes, 33% said it would be more stable. I know it is hardly a definitive poll but given how diabolical this Government have been they should be able to run a poll down the local Conservative club and the majority say Labour could do a better job. Labour should romp home in a general election but if one was called tomorrow I don't even think they would scrape home. I think Corbyn has some great policies but he just isn't connecting with the public and if you can't be polling higher than one of the worst leaders this country has ever had then you simply shouldn't be Labour leader. One of ?? Even I’m reminiscing for Gordon Browns premiership 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted December 11, 2018 Share Posted December 11, 2018 8 minutes ago, peterms said: The whole thing was a construction. There is not a living being, including yourself, who thinks it wasn't. No I’m sure we all thought they got Williamson and Corbyn to stand in front of the Kremlin I think I missed the key word “hat” from my original post tbf , the discussion was of course around Corbyns photoshopped hat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts